Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Reproduction and development

H Spielmann1

  • 1Bundesinstitut für gesundheitlichen Vebrauchershutz und Veterinärmedizin, Berlin, Germany. zebet@bgvv.de

Environmental Health Perspectives
|May 26, 1998
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Progress in toxicological testing: reduction and refinement issues.

Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA·2015
Same author

A Study on UV Filter Chemicals from Annex VII of European Union Directive 76/768/EEC, in the In Vitro 3T3 NRU Phototoxicity Test.

Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA·2015
Same author

Report on the COLIPA Workshop on Mechanisms of Eye Irritation.

Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA·2015
Same author

Issues relating to the release of proprietary information and data for use in the validation of alternative methods.

Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA·2015
Same author

Determination of the Starting Dose for Acute Oral Toxicity (LD50) Testing in the Up and Down Procedure (UDP) From Cytotoxicity Data.

Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA·2014
Same author

Eye Irritation Testing: The Way Forward. The Report and Recommendations of ECVAM Workshop 34.

Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA·2014
Same journal

A New Start.

Environmental health perspectives·2026
Same journal

Time-Varying Exposure to Element Mixtures and Children's Cognition at 5 Years of Age: Findings from the New Hampshire Birth Cohort Study.

Environmental health perspectives·2026
Same journal

Effect of Household Air Pollution on the Gut Microbiome and Virome of Adult Women Living in Uganda.

Environmental health perspectives·2026
Same journal

Comparison of Temperature-Mortality Associations across the Middle East Using Different Exposure Estimation Approaches.

Environmental health perspectives·2026
Same journal

Workflow for Statistical Analysis of Environmental Mixtures.

Environmental health perspectives·2026
Same journal

Effects of Extreme Heat Exposure on Heatstroke and Liver Injury in Mice: The Role of PPARα.

Environmental health perspectives·2026
See all related articles

New in vitro tests show promise for evaluating reproductive and developmental toxicity. These assays can screen compounds, complementing traditional animal testing and conserving resources for more critical evaluations.

Area of Science:

  • Toxicology
  • Reproductive Biology
  • In Vitro Assays

Background:

  • Established in vivo tests for reproductive and developmental toxicology are resource-intensive.
  • Current in vitro methods can assess specific aspects of reproductive function but not the integrated whole.
  • Developmental toxicity testing has a strong foundation for in vitro approaches.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To describe and evaluate in vitro tests for female and male fertility and developmental toxicity.
  • To assess their potential as screening or replacement alternatives to in vivo methods.
  • To determine the utility of these assays in reproductive and developmental toxicology.

Main Methods:

  • Review and evaluation of currently developed and validated in vitro tests.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Assessment of assays using mammalian embryos, embryonic cells, and tissues for developmental toxicity.
  • Analysis of concordance rates between in vitro and in vivo results.

    • Main Results:

    • In vitro methods can evaluate specific components of reproductive functions.
    • In vitro screens for developmental toxicity demonstrate strong predictive power.
    • Validated assays show over 80% concordance with in vivo results.
    • Concordance rates are sufficient for screening purposes.

    Conclusions:

    • In vitro assays are adequate for screening and complementing traditional in vivo testing.
    • These alternative methods can conserve valuable in vivo testing resources.
    • Focusing in vivo resources on compounds with higher market and exposure potential is feasible.